Abstract

Human and artificial negotiators must exchange information to find efficient negotiated agreements, but malicious actors could use deception to gain unfair advantage. The misrepresentation game is a game-theoretic formulation of how deceptive actors could gain disproportionate rewards while seeming honest and fair. Previous research proposed a solution to this game but this required restrictive assumptions that might render it inapplicable to real-world settings. Here we evaluate the formalism against a large corpus of human face-to-face negotiations. We confirm that the model captures how dishonest human negotiators win while seeming fair, even in unstructured negotiations. We also show that deceptive negotiators give-off signals of their malicious behavior, providing the opportunity for algorithms to detect and defeat this malicious tactic.